Search Results

1. Aid-to-decision-of-Coroner-Windley-as-to-scope.pdf [pdf, 667 KB]

   ...cause(s) of each person’s death will be a matter the Coroner will need to (if possible) make a finding on and will therefore automatically be an issue for the Inquiry. Events from the commencement of the attack until completion of the emergency response – in scope Some issues that sufficiently relate to the wider circumstances of the deaths but were not considered by the Royal Commission and only needed to be covered in a limited way in the criminal prosecution, will be investiga...

2. Example Indicative Site Visit Health and Safety Plan-Transportation Provider [pdf, 270 KB]

   ...Site Visit Health and Safety Plan is created and approved by the MoJ and the PCBU. • A copy of this Site Visit Health and Safety Plan is to be provided to the Environment Court, the MoJ, the PCBU and the event organizer, all of whom shall be responsible for providing a copy to relevant personnel. • This Site Visit Health and Safety Plan is well understood and followed. • Individuals participating in the site visit and using the type of transport provided by the PCBU are to...

3. TG v AM & PD Ltd [2023] NZDT 368 (24 July 2023) [pdf, 121 KB]

   ...and TG. However at the hearing, the claim against TG was withdrawn. 4. PD Ltd claims $19,000.00 from TG, TN and BJ Ltd for repairs to its car. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 5 5. So, the issues to be determined are: a. Who was responsible for the collision? b. If AM was responsible, is PD Ltd vicariously liable? c. What if any reasonable costs associated with the damage to the vehicles ought to be paid and in what proportion? Who was responsible for the collisio...

4. Nelson Standards Committee v Bamford [2015] NZLCDT 39 [pdf, 33 KB]

   ...Having considered these, we gave a brief oral decision which we advised the outcome in a broad sense, reserving reasons for our decision. This decision provides those reasons. Background to charges [2] The charges arose out of Mr Bamford’s response to an error of one of his staff members, when that person failed to complete the GST question in an agreement for sale and purchase. Th staff member has already been dealt with by the Standards Committee. [3] As a result of the...

5. O'Connell & Anor v Auckland Council & Ors [2013] NZWHT Auckland 7 [pdf, 294 KB]

   ...............................................................................22 ii. False chimney tops ...................................................................................23 Conclusion on Council liability .............................................................................23 WAS MR FRENCH RESPONSIBLE FOR SITE SUPERVISION OR PROJECT MANAGEMENT? ....................................................................................................25 IS MR FRENCH RESPONS...

6. Chee v Stareast Investment Ltd [pdf, 97 KB]

   ...that the Council could not have insisted on a cavity.2 Additionally, the lack of a cavity has neither caused nor been the source of any water ingress. Deck [15] The deck is a major area of water ingress. Mr Paykel considered it was responsible for 75% of the proven water ingress and all the other experts including the assessor agreed that this was the area that showed the highest moisture readings. [16] There were a number of issues relating to the water penetration...

7. WHT - Chair's directions for lower value claims [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...repairs, where appropriate  A list of all the relevant documents that relate to the property  The required application fee. 3.5 Applications must name the respondent(s) accurately and clearly state the addresses of the respondent(s). 4. Responses to the claim (and replies) 4.1 The Act states respondents must file their responses within 25 working days after receiving the claim. This time limit will only be extended in exceptional circumstances. 4.2 To prepare thei...

8. WHT Claims under $20k - Chair's Directions [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...repairs, where appropriate  A list of all the relevant documents that relate to the property  The required application fee. 3.5 Applications must name the respondent(s) accurately and clearly state the addresses of the respondent(s). 4. Responses to the claim (and replies) 4.1 The Act states respondents must file their responses within 25 working days after receiving the claim. This time limit will only be extended in exceptional circumstances. 4.2 To prepare thei...

9. ST v AHX [2013] NZIACDT 30 (27 May 2013) [pdf, 82 KB]

   ...information from Ms ST’s employer who was overseas at the time. [11] On 7 July 2010, after several failed attempts to get in touch with Mr AHX, Ms ST terminated his services and engaged a new adviser who successfully applied for a residence visa. The Response [12] Mr AHX responded to the complaint in a letter dated 20 September 2011 addressed to the Authority. [13] Mr AHX explained that he was involved in the practice of Mr SNJ’s company on a part-time basis from 20 October 2009...

10. Frequently asked questions & answers – 2022 Intelligence and Security Act 2017 Review

    ...2022 review? Did the Royal Commission of Inquiry make recommendations about the Intelligence and Security Act? Did the review consider the Royal Commission of Inquiry's recommendation to establish a new national intelligence and security agency? Who was responsible for the review? How does this review relate to previous reviews of the intelligence and security agencies? How was the review conducted? What was the outcome of the public engagement process? What happens next now that the review is...

    Located in:

    1. Justice sector & policy >
    2. Key initiatives >
    3. Key initiatives archive >
    4. 2022 periodic review of the Intelligence and Security Act 2017